MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4414258282 · doi:10.1101/2025.09.11.675703

Parallel but distinct adaptive routes in the budding and fission yeasts after 10,000 generations of experimental evolution

2025· preprint· en· W4414258282 on OpenAlexafffund
Arnaud N’Guessan, Vivian Wang, Christopher W. Bakerlee, Greta Brenna, Megan E. Dillingham, Thomas Dupic, Shreyas Gopalakrishnan, Juhee Goyal, Misha Gupta, Caroline M. Holmes, Parris T. Humphrey, Tanush Jagdish, Elizabeth R. Jerison, Milo S. Johnson, Katya Kosheleva, Katherine R. Lawrence, Jiseon Min, Alief Moulana, Angela M. Phillips, Julia C. Piper, Ramya Purkanti, Artur Rego‐Costa, Tatiana Ruiz-Bedoya, Cecilia Trivellin, Michael J. McDonald, Michael M. Desai, Alex N. Nguyen Ba

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2025
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicFungal and yeast genetics research
Canadian institutionsAmorfix (Canada)University of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsExperimental evolutionAdaptation (eye)Budding yeastHuman evolutionary geneticsGenomeTree of life (biology)Adaptive evolutionMolecular evolutionPhylogeneticsGenome evolution

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Quantitative genetics approaches designed to understand the evolution of traits have helped improve our understanding of the genetic basis of adaptation. However, they often overlook crucial aspects of adaptation, including the long-term temporal evolutionary dynamics, the predictability of evolutionary outcomes, the influence of past evolution on future evolutionary trajectories (contingency), and the diversity of molecular mechanisms underlying adaptation. Experimental evolution has been a useful tool for answering these questions, but extracting fundamental principles and predictive features of evolutionary outcomes from these datasets remains challenging due to the large number of covariates and confounding effects, such as differences in experimental setup, species lifestyle, gene content, and evolution rate. Here, we sought to circumvent these challenges by comparing distant yeast species that share several evolutionary features but differ mainly in evolutionary history and genome architecture, i.e. Saccharomyces cerevisiae and Schizosaccharomyces pombe . Thus, we evolved 10 populations of the fission yeast for 10,000 generations in the same conditions as a pre-existing budding yeast dataset (i.e. high-sugar media and hypoxic conditions), allowing us to observe repeatable evolutionary outcomes within species but diverse molecular mechanisms and targets of adaptation across species. The most frequent adapting route in these conditions involved upregulating fermentation genes and downregulating the glycolysis gene pyk1 , which has not previously been observed in S. cerevisiae evolved populations or in wild Kluyveromyces lactis, but similar evolutionary paths have been observed in Schizosaccharomyces japonicus and in clinically relevant populations, such as some cancer cells. This suggests that parallelism is pervasive in the tree of life and that mechanisms of adaptation can be shared among closely related or distant species. Despite similar gene content and identical environments, recurrent adaptation across S. pombe populations involved different genes than in S. cerevisiae and was mostly detectable at the transcriptomic level. This suggests that trans-regulatory effects may play an important role in adaptation on short evolutionary timescales and that differences in evolutionary outcomes between these species may be attributed to contingency.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.236 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)→Same topicFungal and yeast genetics research→French-language works237,207→